Search

The 'microclass' approach advocated by Grusky, Weeden and colleagues emphasises fine-grained occupational differences and their relevance to social reproduction and social mobility. Using recent developments in historical occupational classifications, we adopted a microclass approach to the analysis of intergenerational social mobility using linked census data for Norway and the USA in the late 19th and early 20th century (1850–1910). We describe a procedure that offers an operationalisation of microclass units for these datasets, and show how its application enables us to disentangle different forms of immobility which would not be distinguished in other approaches. Results suggest that microclass immobility is an important part of social reproduction in both Norway and the United States during the era of industrialisation. Both countries reveal a similar balance between 'big class' and 'microclass' immobility patterns. In Norway, the relative importance of microclasses in social reproduction regimes, when compared to the role of 'big class' structures, seems to decline very slightly over the course of industrialisation; but in the USA the relative importance of microclasses seems if anything to increase over the period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Survival from breast cancer is lower in the UK than in some other European countries. We compared survival in England and Norway by age and time from diagnosis. Methods: We included 303,648 English and 24,919 Norwegian cases of breast cancer diagnosed 1996–2004 using flexible parametric relative survival models, enabling improved quantification of differences in survival. Crude probabilities were estimated to partition the probability of death due to all causes into that due to cancer and other causes and to estimate the number of “avoidable” deaths. Results: England had lower relative survival for all ages with the difference increasing with age. Much of the difference was due to higher excess mortality in England in the first few months after diagnosis. Older patients had a higher proportion of deaths due to other causes. At 5 years post diagnosis, a woman aged 85 in England had probabilities of 0.35 of dying of cancer and 0.32 of dying of other causes, whilst in Norway they were 0.26 and 0.35. By eight years the number of “avoidable” all-cause deaths in England was 1020 with the number of “avoidable” breast cancer related deaths 1488. Conclusion: Lower breast cancer survival in England is mainly due to higher mortality in the first year after diagnosis. Crude probabilities aid our understanding of the impact of disease on individual patients and help assess different treatment options. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A recent overview of cancer survival trends 1990–2016 in the Nordic countries reported continued improvements in age-standardized breast cancer survival among women. The aim was to estimate age-specific survival trends over calendar time, including life-years lost, to evaluate if improvements have benefited patients across all ages in the Nordic countries. Data on breast cancers diagnosed 1990–2016 in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden were obtained from the NORDCAN database. Age-standardized and age-specific relative survival (RS) was estimated using flexible parametric models, as was reference-adjusted crude probabilities of death and life-years lost. Age-standardized period estimates of 5-year RS in women diagnosed with breast cancer ranged from 87% to 90% and 10-year RS from 74% to 85%. Ten-year RS increased with 15–18 percentage points from 1990 to 2016, except in Sweden (+9 percentage points) which had the highest survival in 1990. The largest improvements were observed in Denmark, where a previous survival disadvantage diminished. Most recent 5-year crude probabilities of cancer death ranged from 9% (Finland, Sweden) to 12% (Denmark, Iceland), and life-years lost from 3.3 years (Finland) to 4.6 years (Denmark). Although survival improvements were consistent across different ages, women aged ≥70 years had the lowest RS in all countries. Period estimates of 5-year RS were 94–95% in age 55 years and 84–89% in age 75 years, while 10-year RS were 88–91% in age 55 years and 69–84% in age 75 years. Women aged 40 years lost on average 11.0–13.8 years, while women lost 3.8–6.0 years if aged 55 and 1.9–3.5 years if aged 75 years. Survival for Nordic women with breast cancer improved from 1990 to 2016 in all age groups, albeit with larger country variation among older women where survival was also lower. Women over 70 years of age have not had the same survival improvement as women of younger age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine differences in the relative survival and excess death rates of patients with colorectal cancer in Norway, Sweden and England. Methods: All individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer (ICD10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision) C18-C20) between 1996 and 2004 in England, Norway and Sweden were included in this population-based study of patients with colorectal cancer. The main outcome measures were 5-year cumulative relative period of survival and excess death rates stratified by age and period of follow-up. Results: The survival of English patients with colorectal cancer was significantly lower than was observed in both Norway and Sweden. Five-year age-standardised colon cancer relative survival was 51.1% (95% CI 50.1% to 52.0%) in England compared with 57.9% (95% CI 55.2% to 60.5%) in Norway and 59.9% (95% CI 57.7% to 62.0%) in Sweden. Five-year rectal cancer survival was 52.3% (95% CI 51.1% to 53.5%) in England compared with 60.7% (95% CI 57.0% to 64.2%) and 59.8% (95% CI 56.9% to 62.6%) in Norway and Sweden, respectively. The lower survival for colon cancer in England was primarily due to a high number of excess deaths among older patients in the first 3 months after diagnosis. In patients with rectal cancer, excess deaths remained elevated until 2 years of follow-up. If the lower excess death rate in Norway applied in the English population, then 890 (13.6%) and 654 (16.8%) of the excess deaths in the colon and rectal cancer populations, respectively, could have been prevented at 5 years follow-up. Most of these avoidable deaths occurred shortly after diagnosis. Conclusions: There was significant variation in survival between the countries, with the English population experiencing a poorer outcome, primarily due to a relatively higher number of excess deaths in older patients in the short term after diagnosis. It seems likely, therefore, that in England a greater proportion of the population present with more rapidly fatal disease (especially in the older age groups) than in Norway or Sweden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differences in cancer survival between the Nordic countries have previously been reported. The aim of this study was to examine whether these differences in outcome remain, based on updated information from five national cancer registers. The data used for the analysis was from the NORDCAN database focusing on nine common cancers diagnosed 1990–2016 in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden with maximum follow-up through 2017. Relative survival (RS) was estimated at 1 and 5 years using flexible parametric RS models, and percentage point differences between the earliest and latest years available were calculated. A consistent improvement in both 1- and 5-year RS was found for most studied sites across all countries. Previously observed differences between the countries have been attenuated. The improvements were particularly pronounced in Denmark that now has cancer survival similar to the other Nordic countries. The reasons for the observed improvements in cancer survival are likely multifactorial, including earlier diagnosis, improved treatment options, implementation of national cancer plans, uniform national cancer care guidelines and standardized patient pathways. The previous survival disadvantage in Denmark is no longer present for most sites. Continuous monitoring of cancer survival is of importance to assess the impact of changes in policies and the effectiveness of health care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]